IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : March 10, 2026 Union of India and others .. Petitioners Versus Ex. NK Jatinder Pal Singh and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Ashish Chaudhary, Senior Panel Counsel, for the petitioners.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

1. In the present writ petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 20.05.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2-Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) by which, respondent No.1 has been allowed the benefit of rounding off of the disability element of disability pension @ 50% as against 30% w.e.f.

01.01.1996 to 31.12.2015 on the ground that the same is perverse.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon the report of medical examination of respondent No. 1 to contend that though the disability of “Obesity and Essential Hypertension” as assessed @ 30% has been found in respondent No.1, but he has been discharged from service on 31.12.1995 in low medical category BEE (Permanent) on completion of his terms of engagement under Army Rules. Hence, the grant of benefit of rounding off of the disability element @ 50% as against 30% w.e.f.

01.01.1996 to 31.12.2015 by placing reliance upon the judgment of in Civil Appeal No. 5591-2006 titled as KJS Buttar vs. Union of India and another, decided on 31.03.2011 and Civil Appeal No.418-2012 Union of India and others vs. Ram Avtar, decided on 10.12.2014 is incorrect and the facts of the present case have not been appreciated in correct perspective by the Tribunal while passing the impugned order dated 20.05.2024 (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the petitioners has further argued that the benefit of arrears granted to respondent No.1, in pursuance to granting the benefit of rounding off disability pension from 30% to 50%, which has been granted to respondent No.1 for whole of the intervening period, is incorrect in view of the judgment in Shiv Dass vs. Union of India and others, (2007) 9 SCC 274, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has explicitly settled that where a claim is raised after a delay, Courts are to restrict the benefit of arrears to 03 years preceding the filing of the Original Application hence, the grant of disability pension by rounding off @ 50%

along with arrears for whole of the intervening period, is incorrect.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the case file with his able assistance.

4. It is conceded fact that at the time when respondent No.1 was discharged from service on 31.12.1995 on completion of his terms of engagement under Army Rules, he had already rendered 20 years and 12 days of service with the petitioners-Union of India. It is also a conceded fact that at the time when respondent No. 1 joined the armed forces i.e. 20.12.1975, he was medically examined and was not found suffering from any such disease.

5. With regard to grievance of the petitioners qua grant of benefit of rounding off of disability element, as per the settled principle of law settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Ram Avtar’s case (supra), it has been held that an Armed Forces personnel is entitled to be granted the benefit of rounding off with regard to disability pension, irrespective of the fact that he was invalidated out of service, or retired on attaining the age of superannuation or on completion of his tenure of his engagement, if found to be suffering from some disability which is attributable or aggravated by the Military service. Relevant paras of the judgment in Ram Avtar’s case (supra) are as under:-

“4. By the present set of appeals the appellant(s) raise the question, whether or not, an individual, who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation or on completion of his tenure of engagement, if found to be suffering from some disability which is attributable to or aggravated by the military serv